Marc Briggs

Hiroyuki Sanada dijo una vez: "Hay quienes desean una piscina en su casa, mientras que aquellos que la tienen apenas la usan. Quienes han perdido a un ser querido lo extrañan profundamente, mientras que otros que los tienen cerca a menudo se quejan de ellos. Quien no tiene pareja la anhela, pero quien la tiene, a veces no la valora. El que pasa hambre daría todo por un plato de comida, mientras que quien tiene de sobra se queja del sabor. El que no tiene coche lo sueña, mientras que quien lo tiene siempre busca uno mejor. La clave está en ser agradecido, en detenerse a mirar lo que poseemos y comprender que, en algún lugar, alguien daría todo por lo que tú ya tienes y no aprecias".

@Kaspatzis @fixingmoneybtc @BitcoinRachy You seem to be stuck on your 7 tps prejudice. The Lightning network alone destroyed that misprision years ago. It's time to come to terms with the reality that Bitcoin will outlive us both & will create a better world as soon as enough of us stop inexplicably resisting it.

@MarcBriggs @fixingmoneybtc @BitcoinRachy There is no digital capital if you can't place it in cold storage with a reasonable frequency e.g. once per month. 8 billion people can't keep it in cold storage with 7tps. Not even 800 million. Not even 80 million. Can you address that?

Imagine you had to choose your life at age 40: Option A: Single. No kids. 100 BTC in cold storage. A penthouse in Miami. Your own business run your way. A Porsche 911. You check Bitcoin before bed, and wake up to total silence. Option B: Married. 3 kids. 5 BTC locked away for the family. House in the suburbs. A job you truly love. A Toyota Corolla You explain Bitcoin at the dinner table and tuck your kids in at night. Be honest, which life are you choosing?

@Kaspatzis @fixingmoneybtc @BitcoinRachy You presented nothing but generalities, so your objection is laughable. You seem to assume that in a world of digital capital and triple-entry accounting, people will continue to consent to being mercilessly stolen from as if they still lived in a previous analog-capital century.

@MarcBriggs @fixingmoneybtc @BitcoinRachy I have presented plenty of technical arguments to which you have no counter and you just deflect with generalities.

@Kaspatzis @fixingmoneybtc @BitcoinRachy You haven't presented any persuasive reasons. Your detestation of bitcoin is misplaced. Time to reexamine. Please don't resign yourself to a permanent big-bank-kleptocratic future that need not be tolerated.

@fixingmoneybtc @MarcBriggs @BitcoinRachy I agree that we need the best base layer. I just don't think bitcoin is for the seasons I mentionned.

@Kaspatzis @fixingmoneybtc @BitcoinRachy Here is a great, prescient 2 1/2 minute speech by a British MEP from 12 years ago. Fractional reserve banking is not moral enough to win in the long term in a future in which digital capital necessarily exists. youtu.be/hYzX3YZoMrs?si…

This is wishful thinking. The world got into the fractional reserve system because the speed of settlement could not match the speed of transactions. Bitcoin suffers from the same problem in the internet era. If bitcoin ever catches on, the proof of reserve rules will be determined by the central bank. If you own bitcoin and want your bags to pump I wish you all the lack. Bitcoin is not a sovereign money for humanity though.

@Kaspatzis @fixingmoneybtc @BitcoinRachy I'm way up with my bitcoin, even today. So don't worry about me. When it finally dawns on enough people how much bankers have stolen from them, they will revolt, trust me, & btc is maturing enough to help them do so. It might take 25 years, but revolt is baked in the cake now.

@Kaspatzis @fixingmoneybtc @BitcoinRachy The heyday of fractional reserve banking is in the process of passing. In a post 20th century future too many people will realize they neither want nor need it. Anyway, far too many bitcoin-focused companies already incorporate Proof of Reserves, as their customers insist on it.

@MarcBriggs @fixingmoneybtc @BitcoinRachy Exactly. All the world will operate on custodial upper layers while the banks and big institutions will settle on the base layer. Does is remind you of something? Guess what comes next: Fractional bitoin reserves. So what is all the fuss about?

@Kaspatzis @fixingmoneybtc @BitcoinRachy The whole world can in fact build on bitcoin payments. I don't know if anyone has ever advised you of this, but layer 2 and layer 3 solutions to bitcoin payment processing are already and will continue to be fully functional for worldwide commerce.

@fixingmoneybtc @BitcoinRachy There is no independence with 7tps. If bitcoin ever catches on, it will be just digital fiat.

@SimplyBitcoin I don't at all like or appreciate his word "frightened" here. Bitcoin is a commodity of a type never before seen in human history, with numerous unique qualities that remain unmatched by any other commodity. Full stop.

JUST IN: BlackRock’s Larry Fink says “if you're in a country where you're fearful of your future, fearful of your government or you're frightened that your government is devaluing its currency by too much deficits, you can say this is a great potential long term store of value.” #Bitcoin “it’s bigger than any government.”

@chamath @saylor forbes.com/sites/digital-…

1/ In May 2019 a prominent Bitcoin Core developer called Matt Corallo posted a Twitter thread calling for DEI recruitment into Bitcoin development. The same month, John Newbery hired a new co-organiser for Chaincode Labs' developer residency.

By repeatedly adjusting default mempool policy to match what miners will accept anyway (large OP_RETURN uncapped because “they’ll just mine it via bypasses like Libre Relay, or direct APIs”), we are implicitly conceding that miner greed + economic incentives are the ultimate rule-setter, not node-enforced principles. Meaning a (cleverly hidden) capitulation of Bitcoin as a decentralized project. You could say that the “CENSORSHIP!” argument from Core and their supporters on the concept of nodes filtering is a roundabout way of critizing decentralization itself. Nodes were always supposed to be the sovereign check, they decide what they accapt and relay. When we keep loosening policy to align with whatever is the current grift “use case”, and by extension what is short term profitable for miners, it trains the entire ecosystem to treat restrictive node behavior as pointless theater. Over time this hollows out node sovereignty: running a full node becomes more about passively observing the chain that miners + L2s + data-spammers have already decided on, rather than actively enforcing a monetary-first standard. As a cuck bonus it also leads to higher resource costs for every honest node (bandwidth, RAM, storage) à fewer independent verifiers in practice Decentralization starts looking like a performance act. Miners produce the blocks, a handful of relays and L2 sequencers steer the flow, and nodes just… validate after the fact. It’s not a hard-fork capitulation (consensus rules haven’t changed), but it is a cultural, philosophical and operational one. The most profound capitulation in practice. The philosophy flips from “Bitcoin should resist non-monetary garbage even if it costs us some short-term fee revenue” to “whatever pays miners gets standardized because resistance is futile.” Once you accept “miners will do it anyway” as the justification for policy, you’ve already handed the character of Bitcoin over to the highest bidder. Nodes stop being the immune system and start becoming just a polite audience. The OP_RETURN uncap looks a lot like another quiet step toward a two-tier network (miners + insiders set the tone, everyone else just watches. Keep doing this and running a node risks becoming a branding exercise instead of the actual source and guarantee of Bitcoin’s decentralization.

I've spent the last month looking closely at how Bitcoin Core and the network around it has operated the last years. A blatant cultural and philosophical shift. Shocking arrogance and contempt for dissent on display around the OP_RETURN uncap. Opposition was reframed as "harassment", "drama" and "brigading". Consensus was simply declared, in the face of massive controversy and opposition. Bitcoin is imo clearly drifting towards “anything goes if there is a use case out there” relativism. Bitcoin is supposed to be money. That's the mission. Separating money and state. Not being a data layer adapting to the needs of venture-backed projects. Staying neutral while Bitcoin drifts in this direction isn't something I can justify anymore. It feels urgent that something is done to counter it.

My statements stand. Your comments are baseless, shallow and wanting. You'd think the folks paying you (directly or indirectly) to say these things would demand better. Let's follow the money! Here's a select list of seven companies in which your boss David at Bitcoin Magazine is currently invested (through UTXO Management). BIP-110 adoption will most likely (probably certainly) have a significant negative impact on all these companies. Every one of them were formed in 2023/2024, right after the Ordinal Inscription craze began. All of them exploit SegWit/Taproot. And because of Core 30, they now have the option to also exploit OP_RETURN if they choose. Arch Network Best in Slot Bit Layer BOB (Build on Bitcoin) Botanix Merlin Chain OrdinalsBot There are dozens more companies, funded by other Angels and VCs, just like this. IMHO, the primary reason for opposition to BIP-110 is hundreds of millions of dollars behind dozens of companies currently (or planning on) exploiting SegWit and Taproot (and potentially OP_RETURN if they choose). There's a lot of money introducing a ton of malincentives ... folks focused not on immutable money, but a bunch of non-bitcoin related stuff. Hundreds of Dapps, Bapps, Smart Contracts, RWAs, Ordinals, Tokens, Gaming, Lotteries, Prediction Markets, etc, etc, etc.. It's also heavily burdening nodes with ~ 40% block space and UTXO bloat. One example from Arch Network below 👇 Immutable money bitcoiners don't want this crap on their nodes. They don't want to have to download, store and relay this junk forever. All of this seriously threatens decentralization, which puts bitcoin's immutability at risk. Time to retire Shinobi.

Good morning. The 20 millionth Bitcoin was mined yesterday. This means that 95% of all Bitcoin that will ever exist is now in circulation, and it will take 114 years to mine the remaining 5%. No other asset on earth works like this. Have a great day.

900k of the last 1 million bitcoin will already be mined in the next 13 years. The last 100k will take 100 years. Stack accordingly.

My Bitcoin thesis is EXACTLY where it was one year ago. It is stronger and more convicted since the last crypto winter. Nothing has changed. Don't let the X driven algo's that function on "engagement through enragement" affect you. Stack like a smart psychopath.

Wall Street didn't come to "save" Bitcoin; they came to arbitrage it. The Jane Street/ETF saga proves what OGs always said: trusted third parties are security holes. When you hand the keys to market makers who thrive on liquidity traps, you aren't trading "market price" you're trading their manipulated spread. The drain in ETFs isn't a lack of faith in the coin; it's a rejection of "market making" scams. Not your keys, not your coins. Don't trust, verify. 🧡

@KenGardner11 The passer and the shooter were the same player, notice, #10

The assist is even more impressive than the goal.

It seems Jane Street may have had a long-standing culture that essentially trained crypto scammers, and perhaps also concocted and ran some of the scams themselves. Terra/Luna was a jenga tower waiting for somebody to topple it, and it may have been Jane Street that figured out how to do it. If crypto is not strong and secure against such things, it provides little or no benefit over traditional finance, so I'm not going to cry about this, and perhaps it should even be applauded. The alleged Bitcoin ETF market making + "10 am" selling with that liquidity sounds like a considerably more problematic conflict of interest. "Negligent" might be a good way to describe the ETFs who naively trusted Jane Street with this function. Now the once-hot crypto ETFs are draining because of an understandable reduction in trust, not in the coins themselves, but in the way Wall Street "makes markets" for buying and selling them. In finance "everyone is a scammer" -- and you should stop blindly trusting scammers. That is why Bitcoin OGs have long said, "Not your keys, not your coins," "don't trust, verify", and even "trusted third parties are security holes." And when "the market" is so dependent on trusting strangers, especially strangers who still don't actually understand or like Bitcoin all that much, it's also not your "market price." x.com/1914ad/status/…